Let's chat about centos mailing lists !
https://lists.centos.org is powered by mailman package, available in CentOS 7 , itself going EOL next year.
There is no packaged (yet) mailman3 stack (more components than simple mailman 2 stack).
Options :
# use mailman2 package from RHEL8 That means (in theory) that we can just reinstall the machine with RHEL8, and use the package that is available in AppStream repository: mailman.x86_64 3:2.1.29-12.module+el8.5.0+13466+327eb9f3.2 Normally that should be more or less (to be tested though) transparent migration, but as that module is still relying on python2 itself, we don't know when it will itself go EOL in RHEL8 (BaseOS should be 10y but apps in AppStream can have a shorter TTL)
# migrate to mailman3 Clearly much more work to do including see if the mailman3 stack maintainer can branch to epel9 and then we can reuse it. Also time to investigate how to import previous archives from mailman2 to mailman3 but should be doable (needs time to investigate and a PoC)
# something else ?
All comments, opinions are welcome and let's discuss it in advance and not wait next year when machine will be powered off
Kind Regards,
On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 07:25, Fabian Arrotin arrfab@centos.org wrote:
Let's chat about centos mailing lists !
https://lists.centos.org is powered by mailman package, available in CentOS 7 , itself going EOL next year.
There is no packaged (yet) mailman3 stack (more components than simple mailman 2 stack).
Options :
# use mailman2 package from RHEL8 That means (in theory) that we can just reinstall the machine with RHEL8, and use the package that is available in AppStream repository: mailman.x86_64 3:2.1.29-12.module+el8.5.0+13466+327eb9f3.2 Normally that should be more or less (to be tested though) transparent migration, but as that module is still relying on python2 itself, we don't know when it will itself go EOL in RHEL8 (BaseOS should be 10y but apps in AppStream can have a shorter TTL)
I am expecting that the mailman2 will go EOL with the rest of the python2 stack in
Application StreamRelease DateRetirement DateRelease Python 3.9 May 2021 May 2024 8.4.0 Python 3.8 May 2020 May 2023 8.2.0 Python 2.7 May 2019 Jun 2024 8.0.0 (sorry html got added so if it causes email issues the end of life is Jun 2024) [1]
# migrate to mailman3 Clearly much more work to do including see if the mailman3 stack maintainer can branch to epel9 and then we can reuse it. Also time to investigate how to import previous archives from mailman2 to mailman3 but should be doable (needs time to investigate and a PoC)
I know Fedora people have been working on this but that there seems to be not enough 'Round Tuits'[2]for it to get done. I do not know what the sticking points are but I think several of the people are also on the CentOS Stream Hyperscale team so maybe they can say.
[1] https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/rhel-app-streams-life-cycle... [2] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/round_tuit
# something else ?
All comments, opinions are welcome and let's discuss it in advance and not wait next year when machine will be powered off
Kind Regards,
Fabian Arrotin The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | @arrfab[@fosstodon.org] _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 8:13 AM Stephen Smoogen ssmoogen@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 07:25, Fabian Arrotin arrfab@centos.org wrote:
Let's chat about centos mailing lists !
https://lists.centos.org is powered by mailman package, available in CentOS 7 , itself going EOL next year.
There is no packaged (yet) mailman3 stack (more components than simple mailman 2 stack).
Options :
# use mailman2 package from RHEL8 That means (in theory) that we can just reinstall the machine with RHEL8, and use the package that is available in AppStream repository: mailman.x86_64 3:2.1.29-12.module+el8.5.0+13466+327eb9f3.2 Normally that should be more or less (to be tested though) transparent migration, but as that module is still relying on python2 itself, we don't know when it will itself go EOL in RHEL8 (BaseOS should be 10y but apps in AppStream can have a shorter TTL)
I am expecting that the mailman2 will go EOL with the rest of the python2 stack in
Application StreamRelease DateRetirement DateRelease Python 3.9 May 2021 May 2024 8.4.0 Python 3.8 May 2020 May 2023 8.2.0 Python 2.7 May 2019 Jun 2024 8.0.0 (sorry html got added so if it causes email issues the end of life is Jun 2024) [1]
# migrate to mailman3 Clearly much more work to do including see if the mailman3 stack maintainer can branch to epel9 and then we can reuse it. Also time to investigate how to import previous archives from mailman2 to mailman3 but should be doable (needs time to investigate and a PoC)
I know Fedora people have been working on this but that there seems to be not enough 'Round Tuits'[2]for it to get done. I do not know what the sticking points are but I think several of the people are also on the CentOS Stream Hyperscale team so maybe they can say.
We've been working through it. I need to talk to Kevin Fenzi about fixing the half-retired state mailman3 is in, and then we can start branching the whole stack for EPEL 9 and get it built.
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 7:25 AM Fabian Arrotin arrfab@centos.org wrote:
Let's chat about centos mailing lists !
https://lists.centos.org is powered by mailman package, available in CentOS 7 , itself going EOL next year.
There is no packaged (yet) mailman3 stack (more components than simple mailman 2 stack).
Options :
# use mailman2 package from RHEL8 That means (in theory) that we can just reinstall the machine with RHEL8, and use the package that is available in AppStream repository: mailman.x86_64 3:2.1.29-12.module+el8.5.0+13466+327eb9f3.2 Normally that should be more or less (to be tested though) transparent migration, but as that module is still relying on python2 itself, we don't know when it will itself go EOL in RHEL8 (BaseOS should be 10y but apps in AppStream can have a shorter TTL)
# migrate to mailman3 Clearly much more work to do including see if the mailman3 stack maintainer can branch to epel9 and then we can reuse it. Also time to investigate how to import previous archives from mailman2 to mailman3 but should be doable (needs time to investigate and a PoC)
# something else ?
Fedora has a Discourse instance and we've had some CentOS topics there. The CentOS lists are pretty low-traffic. Perhaps we can just migrate to Discourse and not have to run our own mailman instances and servers?
josh
All comments, opinions are welcome and let's discuss it in advance and not wait next year when machine will be powered off
Kind Regards,
Fabian Arrotin The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org gpg key: 17F3B7A1 | @arrfab[@fosstodon.org] _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 11/05/2023 13:35, Josh Boyer wrote:
Fedora has a Discourse instance and we've had some CentOS topics there. The CentOS lists are pretty low-traffic. Perhaps we can just migrate to Discourse and not have to run our own mailman instances and servers?
Discourse is [expleteive deleted] horrible. Please don't.
Trevor
Maybe I'm old school but I just like Mailing Lists and things being brought to my attention.
Considering the Python 2.8 issue my suggestion would be option 3, with the possibility of a short term move to option 2 if we needed to fill in a gap as long as it was a progressive step.
Amy
*Amy Marrich*
She/Her/Hers
Principal Technical Marketing Manager - Cloud Platforms
Red Hat, Inc https://www.redhat.com/
amy@redhat.com
Mobile: 954-818-0514
Slack: amarrich
IRC: spotz https://www.redhat.com/
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 8:06 AM Trevor Hemsley via CentOS-devel < centos-devel@centos.org> wrote:
On 11/05/2023 13:35, Josh Boyer wrote:
Fedora has a Discourse instance and we've had some CentOS topics there. The CentOS lists are pretty low-traffic. Perhaps we can just migrate to Discourse and not have to run our own mailman instances and servers?
Discourse is [expleteive deleted] horrible. Please don't.
Trevor _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 9:33 AM Amy Marrich amy@redhat.com wrote:
Maybe I'm old school but I just like Mailing Lists and things being brought to my attention.
Considering the Python 2.8 issue my suggestion would be option 3, with the possibility of a short term move to option 2 if we needed to fill in a gap as long as it was a progressive step.
By my count, option 3 was "something else". Did you mean "migrate to mailman3"?
Seems like a lot of work for relatively little gain.
josh
I was like why wasn't there an option1, so yeah maybe the options were under the description vs on top, it was before 9am my time:)
*Amy Marrich*
She/Her/Hers
Principal Technical Marketing Manager - Cloud Platforms
Red Hat, Inc https://www.redhat.com/
amy@redhat.com
Mobile: 954-818-0514
Slack: amarrich
IRC: spotz https://www.redhat.com/
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 8:55 AM Josh Boyer jwboyer@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 9:33 AM Amy Marrich amy@redhat.com wrote:
Maybe I'm old school but I just like Mailing Lists and things being
brought to my attention.
Considering the Python 2.8 issue my suggestion would be option 3, with
the possibility of a short term move to option 2 if we needed to fill in a gap as long as it was a progressive step.
By my count, option 3 was "something else". Did you mean "migrate to mailman3"?
Seems like a lot of work for relatively little gain.
josh
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 9:42 AM Trevor Hemsley trevor.hemsley@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 11/05/2023 13:35, Josh Boyer wrote:
Fedora has a Discourse instance and we've had some CentOS topics there. The CentOS lists are pretty low-traffic. Perhaps we can just migrate to Discourse and not have to run our own mailman instances and servers?
Discourse is [expleteive deleted] horrible. Please don't.
Can you describe what value the existing mailing list has for you and why Discourse wouldn't provide that?
I'm looking at how frequently most users post and it seems to be relatively low volume. Maybe just setting Discourse options to email you would cover the read-only nature most people seem to have with the lists?
josh
On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 09:59, Josh Boyer jwboyer@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 9:42 AM Trevor Hemsley trevor.hemsley@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 11/05/2023 13:35, Josh Boyer wrote:
Fedora has a Discourse instance and we've had some CentOS topics there. The CentOS lists are pretty low-traffic. Perhaps we can just migrate to Discourse and not have to run our own mailman instances and servers?
Discourse is [expleteive deleted] horrible. Please don't.
Can you describe what value the existing mailing list has for you and why Discourse wouldn't provide that?
The value I have is mainly the following: 1. I have existing filters which work and tools to read my email in ways which work for me. 2. I have found the discourse2email to be 'flaky' several times in the past with my replies never getting to the site and the message output in a form which hurts my head in fonts/layout. 3. I have tried to use the discourse website for several years and find that its way of working isn't how my brain deals with communication. Like most forums, I get frustrated enough that I find my communication ability turns angry. This isn't unique as many people who hate mailing lists report the same reaction.. their brains don't process the information that way and react poorly to continual usage.
That said, the number of emails on CentOS have dropped greatly, and I know that the amount of work needed to make mailman3 work is not anywhere as simple as mailman2 was. I don't think running a sole-purpose mailing list server is going to make sense for the amount of work now needed.
so I think the possible options are:
Option 1: move to EL-8 mailman2 til next June.. then punt to 2,3,4 Option 2: volunteer and do the work to make mailman3 work (this needs packaging, webwork, database work, importing of old archives, resubscribing n people, etc). Option 2b: volunteer and use a different supportable mailing list software (this needs...) Option 3: discontinue email lists and have Fedora discourse run threads. Option 4: move the mailing lists to another organization and let them manage the email (this needs ...)
I'm looking at how frequently most users post and it seems to be relatively low volume. Maybe just setting Discourse options to email you would cover the read-only nature most people seem to have with the lists?
josh
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Option 1: move to EL-8 mailman2 til next June.. then punt to 2,3,4
I think EL-7 EOL is at the same time as Python 2.7 EOL so would migrating to EL-8 really provide a benefit? I suppose if you use RHEL-8 you at least get OS security updates after, even if Python itself is unsupported.
On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 10:27 -0400, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
so I think the possible options are:
Option 1: move to EL-8 mailman2 til next June.. then punt to 2,3,4 Option 2: volunteer and do the work to make mailman3 work (this needs packaging, webwork, database work, importing of old archives, resubscribing n people, etc). Option 2b: volunteer and use a different supportable mailing list software (this needs...) Option 3: discontinue email lists and have Fedora discourse run threads. Option 4: move the mailing lists to another organization and let them manage the email (this needs ...)
Not necessarily advocating, but I'm going to add:
Option 3b: discontinue email lists and have a dedicated CentOS Discourse.
Red Hat has a contract for hosted Discourse. I don't know the details off-hand, but an additional instance might be an easy addition.
-- Shaun
On 11/05/2023 21:38, Shaun McCance wrote:
On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 10:27 -0400, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
so I think the possible options are:
Option 1: move to EL-8 mailman2 til next June.. then punt to 2,3,4 Option 2: volunteer and do the work to make mailman3 work (this needs packaging, webwork, database work, importing of old archives, resubscribing n people, etc). Option 2b: volunteer and use a different supportable mailing list software (this needs...) Option 3: discontinue email lists and have Fedora discourse run threads. Option 4: move the mailing lists to another organization and let them manage the email (this needs ...)
Not necessarily advocating, but I'm going to add:
Option 3b: discontinue email lists and have a dedicated CentOS Discourse.
<personal opinion> I don't like Discourse, it's not a mailing-list and you can't read threads from a mail client, which lot of people, including me, are used to ... </personal opinion>
If discontinuing the email lists is a CentOS board choice, maybe it's better to not reinvent the wheel and "merge" it with Fedora instance (with sub-categories, threads, $whatever) ? That way, Fedora folks managing one instance don't have to manage another one ?
Just me two cents :-)
On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 4:02 AM Fabian Arrotin arrfab@centos.org wrote:
On 11/05/2023 21:38, Shaun McCance wrote:
On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 10:27 -0400, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
so I think the possible options are:
Option 1: move to EL-8 mailman2 til next June.. then punt to 2,3,4 Option 2: volunteer and do the work to make mailman3 work (this needs packaging, webwork, database work, importing of old archives, resubscribing n people, etc). Option 2b: volunteer and use a different supportable mailing list software (this needs...) Option 3: discontinue email lists and have Fedora discourse run threads. Option 4: move the mailing lists to another organization and let them manage the email (this needs ...)
Not necessarily advocating, but I'm going to add:
Option 3b: discontinue email lists and have a dedicated CentOS Discourse.
<personal opinion> I don't like Discourse, it's not a mailing-list and you can't read threads from a mail client, which lot of people, including me, are used to ... </personal opinion>
If discontinuing the email lists is a CentOS board choice, maybe it's better to not reinvent the wheel and "merge" it with Fedora instance (with sub-categories, threads, $whatever) ? That way, Fedora folks managing one instance don't have to manage another one ?
Just me two cents :-)
Fedora's Discourse is run by Civilized Discourse Construction Kit (the developers of Discourse), not Fedora.
Getting a CentOS Discourse instance would not add any load for anyone, since nobody in Fedora/CentOS would be "maintaining" it as CDCK would be contracted to run it too.
I'd rather keep mailing lists for development myself. For that, I would suggest moving them to Fedora's instance and leveraging the multi-domain feature so that lists.centos.org goes to Fedora's instance.
-- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
On 13/05/2023 12:42, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 4:02 AM Fabian Arrotin arrfab@centos.org wrote:
On 11/05/2023 21:38, Shaun McCance wrote:
On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 10:27 -0400, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
so I think the possible options are:
Option 1: move to EL-8 mailman2 til next June.. then punt to 2,3,4 Option 2: volunteer and do the work to make mailman3 work (this needs packaging, webwork, database work, importing of old archives, resubscribing n people, etc). Option 2b: volunteer and use a different supportable mailing list software (this needs...) Option 3: discontinue email lists and have Fedora discourse run threads. Option 4: move the mailing lists to another organization and let them manage the email (this needs ...)
Not necessarily advocating, but I'm going to add:
Option 3b: discontinue email lists and have a dedicated CentOS Discourse.
<personal opinion> I don't like Discourse, it's not a mailing-list and you can't read threads from a mail client, which lot of people, including me, are used to ... </personal opinion>
If discontinuing the email lists is a CentOS board choice, maybe it's better to not reinvent the wheel and "merge" it with Fedora instance (with sub-categories, threads, $whatever) ? That way, Fedora folks managing one instance don't have to manage another one ?
Just me two cents :-)
Fedora's Discourse is run by Civilized Discourse Construction Kit (the developers of Discourse), not Fedora.
Getting a CentOS Discourse instance would not add any load for anyone, since nobody in Fedora/CentOS would be "maintaining" it as CDCK would be contracted to run it too.
I was more thinking about the "moderators" than the infra itself (as it's hosted, as you mentioned it) ;-)
I'd rather keep mailing lists for development myself. For that, I would suggest moving them to Fedora's instance and leveraging the multi-domain feature so that lists.centos.org goes to Fedora's instance.
Well, I heard that Fedora-devel itself will move to discourse .. ? So my understanding is that it would be end of mailing lists, for both Fedora and CentOS ?
On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 8:07 AM Fabian Arrotin arrfab@centos.org wrote:
On 13/05/2023 12:42, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 4:02 AM Fabian Arrotin arrfab@centos.org wrote:
On 11/05/2023 21:38, Shaun McCance wrote:
On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 10:27 -0400, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
so I think the possible options are:
Option 1: move to EL-8 mailman2 til next June.. then punt to 2,3,4 Option 2: volunteer and do the work to make mailman3 work (this needs packaging, webwork, database work, importing of old archives, resubscribing n people, etc). Option 2b: volunteer and use a different supportable mailing list software (this needs...) Option 3: discontinue email lists and have Fedora discourse run threads. Option 4: move the mailing lists to another organization and let them manage the email (this needs ...)
Not necessarily advocating, but I'm going to add:
Option 3b: discontinue email lists and have a dedicated CentOS Discourse.
<personal opinion> I don't like Discourse, it's not a mailing-list and you can't read threads from a mail client, which lot of people, including me, are used to ... </personal opinion>
If discontinuing the email lists is a CentOS board choice, maybe it's better to not reinvent the wheel and "merge" it with Fedora instance (with sub-categories, threads, $whatever) ? That way, Fedora folks managing one instance don't have to manage another one ?
Just me two cents :-)
Fedora's Discourse is run by Civilized Discourse Construction Kit (the developers of Discourse), not Fedora.
Getting a CentOS Discourse instance would not add any load for anyone, since nobody in Fedora/CentOS would be "maintaining" it as CDCK would be contracted to run it too.
I was more thinking about the "moderators" than the infra itself (as it's hosted, as you mentioned it) ;-)
I'd rather keep mailing lists for development myself. For that, I would suggest moving them to Fedora's instance and leveraging the multi-domain feature so that lists.centos.org goes to Fedora's instance.
Well, I heard that Fedora-devel itself will move to discourse .. ? So my understanding is that it would be end of mailing lists, for both Fedora and CentOS ?
That is not a surefire thing. Fedora will be testing the Changes process discussion on Discourse for Fedora 40, but nothing is changing beyond that.
On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 06:42:25AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
I'd rather keep mailing lists for development myself. For that, I would suggest moving them to Fedora's instance and leveraging the multi-domain feature so that lists.centos.org goes to Fedora's instance.
Random, stupid, thought: Neal, Fabian and Smooge, you are aware of the issues Fedora has been having with its Mailman 3 instance, partly due to the fact that we were amongst the first to migrate to mm3 which actually ended up giving problems to upgrade down the line.
So here goes crazy: what if there was a new MM3 server built for the CentOS lists and then the remaining Fedora lists would look to be migrated to that same instance? It achieves the same outcome as what's described above: 1 instance, using multi-domains, maintained by 1 team (CPE), for the CentOS and Fedora (and pagure [1]) communities, but in reverse order and possibly giving an "easier" upgrade path to the Fedora instance.
Food for thoughts :)
Pierre
[1] though these lists are a lot quieter these days
On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 5:35 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon pingou@pingoured.fr wrote:
On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 06:42:25AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
I'd rather keep mailing lists for development myself. For that, I would suggest moving them to Fedora's instance and leveraging the multi-domain feature so that lists.centos.org goes to Fedora's instance.
Random, stupid, thought: Neal, Fabian and Smooge, you are aware of the issues Fedora has been having with its Mailman 3 instance, partly due to the fact that we were amongst the first to migrate to mm3 which actually ended up giving problems to upgrade down the line.
So here goes crazy: what if there was a new MM3 server built for the CentOS lists and then the remaining Fedora lists would look to be migrated to that same instance? It achieves the same outcome as what's described above: 1 instance, using multi-domains, maintained by 1 team (CPE), for the CentOS and Fedora (and pagure [1]) communities, but in reverse order and possibly giving an "easier" upgrade path to the Fedora instance.
Food for thoughts :)
I wonder if we can make the visual style change depending on the domain you're accessing it from. But otherwise it's basically six one way, half dozen the other. I suspect the plan would be to stand up a brand new instance and do a data migration anyway, since the existing one is kinda held together with silly putty.
I went through a fair bit of pain to clean up the Mailman 3 stack over the years, and it wouldn't surprise me if things were more than a little weird in the current Fedora instance because of some of that early stuff.
Currently, my understanding is that Fedora's instance is set up with the following domains:
* lists.fedoraproject.org * lists.fedorahosted.org * lists.pagure.io
We'd be adding "lists.centos.org" to that pile. We can start in reverse order if we want (centos -> pagure -> fedorahosted -> fedoraproject).
But I do agree that we should see if we can have the appropriate branding show up depending on which domain you visit the Postorius/HyperKitty instances from.
That's more of a question of working the HyperKitty and Postorius theming system more than anything else. :)
We should absolutely migrate people's list subscriptions though. If we can pull it off, their list subscription settings too.
-- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
On 11/05/2023 14:58, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 9:42 AM Trevor Hemsley trevor.hemsley@ntlworld.com wrote:
On 11/05/2023 13:35, Josh Boyer wrote:
Fedora has a Discourse instance and we've had some CentOS topics there. The CentOS lists are pretty low-traffic. Perhaps we can just migrate to Discourse and not have to run our own mailman instances and servers?
Discourse is [expleteive deleted] horrible. Please don't.
Can you describe what value the existing mailing list has for you and why Discourse wouldn't provide that?
The mailing list works. Discourse does not.
"Unfortunately, your browser is unsupported https://www.discourse.org/faq/#browser. Please switch to a supported browser https://browsehappy.com to view rich content, log in and reply."
I _like_ my current browser thanks very much. I do not want to and will not switch it in order to read things like this.
And that's after allowing about 1000 different things access in noscript, none of which I really want to enable.
Mailing lists work. Mail clients have excellent filtering and filing capabillities. Web browsers do not.
Trevor
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 7:25 AM Fabian Arrotin arrfab@centos.org wrote:
Let's chat about centos mailing lists !
https://lists.centos.org is powered by mailman package, available in CentOS 7 , itself going EOL next year.
There is no packaged (yet) mailman3 stack (more components than simple mailman 2 stack).
Options :
# use mailman2 package from RHEL8 That means (in theory) that we can just reinstall the machine with RHEL8, and use the package that is available in AppStream repository: mailman.x86_64 3:2.1.29-12.module+el8.5.0+13466+327eb9f3.2 Normally that should be more or less (to be tested though) transparent migration, but as that module is still relying on python2 itself, we don't know when it will itself go EOL in RHEL8 (BaseOS should be 10y but apps in AppStream can have a shorter TTL)
# migrate to mailman3 Clearly much more work to do including see if the mailman3 stack maintainer can branch to epel9 and then we can reuse it. Also time to investigate how to import previous archives from mailman2 to mailman3 but should be doable (needs time to investigate and a PoC)
# something else ?
Fedora has a Discourse instance and we've had some CentOS topics there. The CentOS lists are pretty low-traffic. Perhaps we can just migrate to Discourse and not have to run our own mailman instances and servers?
josh
What I'm really missing is a mailing list which covers them all, RHEL, CentOS including all the clones like Alma, Rocky, Navy, Springdale, Oracle, EuroLinux and what else. CentOS list was the one in the past but since CentOS Stream it has lost many users.
Am I the only one missing such a list?
Thanks, Simon
On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 13:24 +0200, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
# use mailman2 package from RHEL8 That means (in theory) that we can just reinstall the machine with RHEL8, and use the package that is available in AppStream repository: mailman.x86_64 3:2.1.29-12.module+el8.5.0+13466+327eb9f3.2 Normally that should be more or less (to be tested though) transparent migration, but as that module is still relying on python2 itself, we don't know when it will itself go EOL in RHEL8 (BaseOS should be 10y but apps in AppStream can have a shorter TTL)
From the artwork side, this option is the most preferred one. It allows us to reuse the ansible roles model we've been working on to customize the application visual presentation and provide a unified look for CentOS websites.
# migrate to mailman3 Clearly much more work to do including see if the mailman3 stack maintainer can branch to epel9 and then we can reuse it. Also time to investigate how to import previous archives from mailman2 to mailman3 but should be doable (needs time to investigate and a PoC)
This is also a viable option. Though, it would require some time to implement. I understand mailman3 provides a different/better options to customize the application visual presentation than mailman2 does. I could look into it and adapt what we have.
# something else ?
Merging CentOS content into a Fedora application (e.g., using only tags, categories and such), reduces the CentOS project visual recognition considerably. The CentOS artwork sig is ruled by the idea of "one unique name and one unique visual style for all visual manifestations" which may be defeated if we cannot update the visual presentation of the application the CentOS content is being moved to, because it already serves a different project's visual identity.
Having CentOS applications running on Fedora infrastructure (or elsewhere) is totally fine. The relevant part is having absolute autonomy to visually present CentOS as a different project. One that stands unique on its purpose.
Best regards,
-
Alain Reguera Delgado -
Amy Marrich -
Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden -
Fabian Arrotin -
Josh Boyer -
Neal Gompa -
Pierre-Yves Chibon -
Shaun McCance -
Simon Matter -
Stephen Smoogen -
Trevor Hemsley